As a correspondence chess player, I have several engines to test critical positions. So, some days ago I decided to put them all into a little test:
1. 34 positions.
2. Computer: my old laptop: Macbook pro 10 years old.
3. MPV = 1.
4. Time for position: 7 minutes.

I'm surprised by Critter results, this old guy has finished in second position ... really close to AsmFish. In my opinion, Critter seems to be very good solving tactical positions, where a piece sacrifice is needed.

I would appreciate your opinion about Critter. Do you think is a good engine for solving tests nowadays?? or the big ones (Komodo, Stockfish, ...) should be the only opinion to take into account?

As a correspondence chess player, I have several engines to test critical positions. So, some days ago I decided to put them all into a little test:
1. 34 positions.
2. Computer: my old laptop: Macbook pro 10 years old.
3. MPV = 1.
4. Time for position: 7 minutes.

I'm surprised by Critter results, this old guy has finished in second position ... really close to AsmFish. In my opinion, Critter seems to be very good solving tactical positions, where a piece sacrifice is needed.

I would appreciate your opinion about Critter. Do you think is a good engine for solving tests nowadays?? or the big ones (Komodo, Stockfish, ...) should be the only opinion to take into account?

Have you changed the default settings of Critter?
People always forget that Critter uses 4 threads by default...

Moreover a few test positions, no matter how nicely selected, will never give an appropriate picture.

Where did you come up with that nonsense? Critter has a long history in rating lists, long before H was "born".
First Houdini was basically 1:1 clone of "Robbolito", which was ... well
Where Houdart steals from today, I don't know. But I have an idea